ArticlePloS one2017
Treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms yesterday and now.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Comparison of endovascular and microsurgical treatment in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage requiring external ventricular drainage.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Clinical diagnostic reference levels in neuroradiology based on clinical indication.Radiation protection dosimetry · 2024Article
- Comparison of Angiographic Outcomes of Woven EndoBridge and Balloon-Assisted Coiling for the Treatment of Ruptured Wide-Necked Aneurysms: A Multicentric Study.Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Neurocritical care complications and interventions influence the outcome in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage.BMC neurology · 2021Observational
- Antiplatelet Management for Stent-Assisted Coiling and Flow Diversion of Ruptured Intracranial Aneurysms: A DELPHI Consensus Statement.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2020Article
- Observational
- Impact of Complications and Comorbidities on the Intensive Care Length of Stay after Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Haemorrhage.Scientific reports · 2020Observational
- Outcome After Clipping and Coiling for Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage in Clinical Practice in Europe, USA, and Australia.Neurosurgery · 2019Article
- Evaluation of the yield of post-clipping angiography and nationwide current practice.Acta neurochirurgica · 2019Article
- Article
- Impact of Comorbidities and Smoking on the Outcome in Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage.Scientific reports · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis prospective study is designed to detect changes in the treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms over a period of 17 years.
methodsWe compared 361 treated cases of aneurysm occlusion after subarachnoid hemorrhage from 1997 to 2003 with 281 cases from 2006 to 2014. Specialists of neuroradiology and vascular neurosurgery decided over the modality assignment. We established a prospective data acquisition in both groups to detect significant differences within a follow-up time of one year. With this setting we evaluated the treatment methods over time and compared endovascular with microsurgical treatment.
resultsWhen compared to the earlier group, microsurgical treatment was less frequently chosen in the more recent collective because of neck-configuration. Endovascular treatment was chosen more frequently over time (31.9% versus 48.8%). Occurrence of initial symptomatic ischemic stroke was significantly lower in the clipping group compared to the endovascular group and remained stable over time. The number of reinterventions due to refilled treated aneurysms significantly decreased in the endovascular group at one-year follow-up, but the significantly better occlusion- and reintervention-rate of the microsurgical group persisted. The rebleeding rate in the endovascular group at one year follow-up decreased from 6.1% to 2.2% and showed no statistically significant difference to the microsurgical group, anymore (endovascular 2.2% versus microsurgical 0.0%, p = 0.11).
conclusionMicrosurgical clipping still has some advantages, however endovascular treatment is improving rapidly.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.